Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Nuclear Fusion article
Author Message
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #1
Nuclear Fusion article
04-01-2009 06:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #2
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
NIF's H-bomb simulation is very useful. I have some familiarity with it.

Fusion as an energy source for the country is far from close, 20 years minimum from the standard designs.

If the current cold-fusion process, or the device that the NM people mention, works then there may be something there. But, the talk is that it's not traditional fusion, so no-one knows a priori if this will lead anywhere. Even if something does work (and that's a BIG if) then monetary calcs will need to be done to see what the break even point is (or if there's a break even point).

I'd much rather see attention paid to solar thermal. If you combine that w/ a national water pipeline, so that floodwater in ND can be shipped to Lake Powell and Lake Mead, then you can handle the demographics where people continue to move to the SE. Traditional population centers in the NY, PA, and the NW Territory will shrink but then be converted back to farmland to accomodate the growing population.
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2009 07:38 AM by DrTorch.)
04-01-2009 07:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
I thought the hybrid idea was interesting.
04-01-2009 07:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #4
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
(04-01-2009 07:44 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I thought the hybrid idea was interesting.

Certainly takes some steam from the naysayers who don't want spent fuel around. But incredibly complex, which adds to the risk, and that's even if you can get a design that works.
04-01-2009 07:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Stanley Offline
L'Étoile du Nord
*

Posts: 19,103
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 994
I Root For: NIU
Location: Cold. So cold......
Post: #5
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
(04-01-2009 07:38 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  If you combine that w/ a national water pipeline, so that floodwater in ND can be shipped to Lake Powell and Lake Mead,

A national water pipeline? Eeenteresting.

So how would this flesh out? Only when there is excess water? Who decides when the water is excess? That floodwater all ultimately drains back into ground or flows into other areas. Also, that water is dirty and poluted, how is it cleaned?

Sounds like the ulitmate political hot potato. Will be seen as Robbing Peter to Pay Paul.
04-01-2009 08:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #6
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
(04-01-2009 08:12 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  
(04-01-2009 07:38 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  If you combine that w/ a national water pipeline, so that floodwater in ND can be shipped to Lake Powell and Lake Mead,

A national water pipeline? Eeenteresting.

So how would this flesh out? Only when there is excess water? Who decides when the water is excess? That floodwater all ultimately drains back into ground or flows into other areas. Also, that water is dirty and poluted, how is it cleaned?

Those are all very important questions.

1. Yes, there needs to be a law that only flood waters will be transferred. Water rights have always been a big issue throughout the history of man, and taking water from unflooded regions (presumably to sell) will eventually steal from those downstream who receive water naturally. Of course we already to this to Mexico from the Colorado.

However, when it comes to floods, as in ND...those floods tend to go downstream as well. Shipping floodwater at the source will save much pain for many people.

2. Flood levels are already defined, although I'm sure it would change to "so many feet above normal" once water becomes a marketable commodity.

3. I would envision a sparse spider web of pipes. It would fconnect only large sources...let the existing waterways take over from there. Anyway, the water gets dumped into rivers and reservoirs, which are also dirty. Then they are cleaned by municipalities.

I have anticipated some of these questions and other consequences such as demographics. To me, when Seattle is flooding, and Dallas is in a drought, it makes sense to try to do something about it. Furthermore, this would be a "stimulus" to the country, and provide valuable infrastructure.

There is a legitimate concern of adding foreign species to new waterways. Zebra mussels, snakefish, all have origins like this, and there are potentially devastating consequences. Some effort at remediating this risk will have to be conceived.
04-01-2009 08:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,643
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #7
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
We need long-term and short-term solutions.

Rule of thumb: If it exists only in a lab now, 20 years is the earliest it will help.

We need something to get us from 2009 to 2025. Obama's current "energy plan" will have us importing more oil in 2015 than we do today, unless his "stimulus plan" totally craters the economy (a reasonably possible alternative). We can--and must--do better.
04-01-2009 09:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


I45owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,374
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Dallas, TX

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #8
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
I've posted on Robert Bussard's Polywell Fusor before - this video is pretty enlightening (I can't recall if laser fusion is addressed, but Bussard does express his opinion on the perpetual 20-year advent of viable fusion reactors).

Revision to the rule of thumb: if it's projected to be in a lab in 20 years, and 20 years ago it was projected to be in a lab now, then ...

Tokamak is fun stuff, but I'm becoming more skeptical that it will culminate in a viable commercial fusion reactor.


Also see: Fusion is the new Fire (In part, a response to the late Dr. Bussard's talk).

edit: Fusion is the fuel of the Future, and it Always Will Be!
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2009 10:32 AM by I45owl.)
04-01-2009 10:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,643
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #9
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
It often turns out that one of the quickest ways to get futuristic technology out of the lab is to start working with whatever we have now. This is one of the lessons from Brasil. Instead of waiting on solutions to come out of the lab, they took what they had and went with it, expecting to update as better technology came along.

The primo example of this in their energy solution is that once Petrobras stepped offshore, they just kept finding more and more in deeper and deeper water, and they kept developing the technology to keep up. Now they are drilling in 7000 feet of water (with 3000 feet of salt layer below that on the sea bottom) and expecting to start production from there in the not too distant future.

A slightly different example might be sugar cane ethanol. They used it instead of waiting on switchgrass or cellulose or something to come out of the lab. They had the cane, and could do it, with really pretty primitive technology. One of their ethanol plants looks like something out of the 1700s compared to a modern refinery. Now they have the distribution channels in place, when one of the more exotic processes becomes commercially viable, their changeover will be pretty easy.
04-01-2009 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


DrTorch Offline
Proved mach and GTS to be liars
*

Posts: 35,887
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 201
I Root For: ASU, BGSU
Location:

CrappiesDonatorsBalance of Power Contest
Post: #10
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
(04-01-2009 02:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  It often turns out that one of the quickest ways to get futuristic technology out of the lab is to start working with whatever we have now.

You might even say that "Necessity is the mother of invention".
04-01-2009 02:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #11
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
It will have to be cold fusion. Quite simply *everything* melts at several thousand degrees centigrade. You're literally trying to contain the same reaction that drives the sun.
04-02-2009 12:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RobertN Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 35,485
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation: 95
I Root For: THE NIU Huskies
Location: Wayne's World
Post: #12
RE: Nuclear Fusion article
(04-01-2009 08:12 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  
(04-01-2009 07:38 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  If you combine that w/ a national water pipeline, so that floodwater in ND can be shipped to Lake Powell and Lake Mead,

A national water pipeline? Eeenteresting.

So how would this flesh out? Only when there is excess water? Who decides when the water is excess? That floodwater all ultimately drains back into ground or flows into other areas. Also, that water is dirty and poluted, how is it cleaned?

Sounds like the ulitmate political hot potato. Will be seen as Robbing Peter to Pay Paul.
I believe this is something seriously being looked at but most(all?) the states around the Great Lakes are against it because once it is built, the thought is that the water from the Great Lakes would become involved. THe thought is they don't want to drain the lakes just to make sure those who live in Arizona, California, etc can water their grass in the desert or for fountains and use in the Vegas hotels because once it is used for that, the lakes depths will drop(some/all are already) because there isn't enough precip to refresh the lost water. But this is on fusion so continue the discussion. :)
04-02-2009 02:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.